Market Gains in Davison County, South Dakota, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 150
Recipients of Market Gains from farms in Davison County, South Dakota totaled $3,973,000 in from 1995-2021.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Market Gains 1995-2021 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Donald Paul Blindauer | Mitchell, SD 57301 | $329,147 |
| 2 | Gregory Gene Plamp | Mitchell, SD 57301 | $158,965 |
| 3 | Lewis Gordon Bainbridge | Ethan, SD 57334 | $143,199 |
| 4 | Wayne Lyons | Mitchell, SD 57301 | $140,996 |
| 5 | Dakota Acres | Mitchell, SD 57301 | $139,364 |
| 6 | Randall Wallace Miiller | Mitchell, SD 57301 | $129,919 |
| 7 | Steven W Miiller Estate | Mitchell, SD 57301 | $122,389 |
| 8 | Richard Allen Gerlach | Mount Vernon, SD 57363 | $107,599 |
| 9 | Dale Kenneth Smith | Mitchell, SD 57301 | $96,740 |
| 10 | Mark Allen Meier | Mount Vernon, SD 57363 | $88,190 |
| 11 | Lyle James Bode | Mount Vernon, SD 57363 | $87,473 |
| 12 | John Lee Wieczorek | Mount Vernon, SD 57363 | $84,202 |
| 13 | Dennis Michael Napolitano | Sioux Falls, SD 57110 | $83,414 |
| 14 | Delmar Plamp | Mitchell, SD 57301 | $80,402 |
| 15 | Circle W Land & Cattl LLC | Mount Vernon, SD 57363 | $80,233 |
| 16 | Patricia Lou Wieczorek | Chaska, MN 55318 | $77,779 |
| 17 | David Louis Nebelsick | Mount Vernon, SD 57363 | $76,715 |
| 18 | Dan J Moller | Stickney, SD 57375 | $73,665 |
| 19 | Loren Charles Wegehaupt | Mount Vernon, SD 57363 | $71,515 |
| 20 | Hetland Farms Inc | Mitchell, SD 57301 | $69,573 |
* USDA data are not "transparent" for many payments made to recipients through most cooperatives. Recipients of payments made through most cooperatives, and the amounts, have not been made public. To see ownership information, click on the name, then click on the link that is titled Ownership Information.
** EWG has identified this recipient as a bank or lending institution that received the payment because the payment applicant had a loan requiring any subsidy payments go to the lender first. In 2019, the information provided to EWG by USDA began to include the entity that received the payment, rather than the person or entity that applied for it, which was previously provided. This move to shield subsidy recipients from disclosure enables USDA to further evade taxpayer accountability. Six percent of subsidy dollars went to banks, lending institutions, or the Farm Service Agency.”
Next >>
Federal crop insurance reform vital for incentivizing climate adaptation on farms
Farm Subsidies Ballooned Under Trump
Is Federal Crop Insurance Policy Leading to Another Dust Bowl?
Double Dipping:
The "Farm Crisis" Myth
Crying Wolf